|
Dangerous
Discussions Warning Signs: Us vs. Them
“We have met the enemy and he is us,”
- Walt Kelly, Pogo comic strip, poster, etc.
- 1970
Dangerous
Discussion Issues - Significant, Controversial, Tractable
Dangerous Discussion issues
are characterized by ineffective conflicts and realistic
hopes. For these issues, diverse stakeholders:
1. hold strong, varied opinions, and
2. cannot communicate often, easily, or effectively
enough.
However,
there is also good reason to believe that we are
likely to make
significant improvements by working together civilly and
constructively on these issues.
As members of academic communities we,
especially, should be able to deal honestly, openly,
respectfully, and constructively with these issues.
Specific lists of issues, topics, ...
[Change title from
"Dangerous Discussions" to... ?]
Back to Top of Page
Goals
Identify Dangerous Discussion issues that have the
potential, if resolved even partially, for contributing to
significant improvements in teaching and learning (with
technology). Enable and help diverse groups in higher
education to work together civilly on these issues and to
develop and implement realistic responses to them. Use
technology effectively in ways that support, rather than
undermine, effective communication and collaboration to
achieve these goals.
Find or build new options that benefit as
many as possible, while increasing mutual respect and
understanding among participants.
Convert dangerous discussions into
constructive conversations:
Encourage heat and light without flames.
Back to Top of Page
Strategies
[See also
Requirements - Essential Characteristics for Dangerous
Discussions;
and
Guidelines and Ground Rules]
I.
Select issues - significant, controversial, tractable
II. Bring diverse
stakeholders together for civil, constructive conversations
III. Develop Solutions
Back
to Top of Page
I.
Select issues
that are significant, controversial, and tractable
Help participants
identify “Dangerous Discussions” issues that they can
address effectively together in higher education -- ranging
from within student project teams to meetings of the
president’s cabinet – and beyond.
- Issues relevant to
higher education.
- Issues relevant to
improving teaching and learning with technology.
- Issues important to
everyone involved.
- Issues where many
stakeholders incorrectly see their only options
as win or lose, defend or attack.
- If key stakeholders can
work together civilly and effectively on one of these
issues, it is likely they can make significant
improvements.
- Help
participants recognize and acknowledge situations where
this collaborative, constructive approach cannot work.
Back to Top of
Page
II.
Bring diverse
stakeholders together for civil, constructive conversations
(face-to-face, online, hybrid)
There are many ways to structure a
discussion about Dangerous Discussions issues. There are
almost as many different motivations and goals for
addressing these issues as there are stakeholders in the
results of the dialogue. Some approaches are more likely to
facilitate civil and constructive dialogue. Others are more
likely to bury opportunities for real solutions.
We hope to help you work through dangerous
Us/Them discussions. We try to minimize unnecessary
acrimony and maximize constructive give and take - to help
you eliminate the flames, reduce the heat, and illuminate
the real solutions.
A. (Re)Formulate
issues fairly and inclusively
Identify and influence
contextual factors that make a specific topic/question more
or less dangerous. Formulate challenging topics/questions
in ways that obviously respect opposing views (while
acknowledging any widely shared opinions).
Show respect for the needs and
hopes of diverse stakeholders; make all participants feel
that their viewpoints are being fairly represented.
B. Share essential
information
Assemble and
provide the minimum information necessary - adapted to
participants’ own institutions, situations, and current
conditions - with as much clarity and as little bias as
possible. Make it accessible to all stakeholders before it
is too late to be useful.
C. Keep asking (not
rhetorically!):
“How can we help
each other?”
“How can we work together?”
-
The facilitator/leader
visibly respects and is respected by all those who hold
conflicting views or goals.
-
Begin with these questions:
Why bother? Who cares? Who is needed? What are the
real options? What is likely to help or hinder?
-
Deal constructively with
strong feelings. When necessary, structure these
conversations to tolerate the expression of strong
feelings as participants work together to identify and
overcome obstacles.
-
Acknowledge and move beyond
impasses toward constructive action; don’t get stuck on
the past. Don't waste people's time! Recognize
conditions or situations when this collaborative,
constructive approach is not working. Acknowledge the
need for alternative approaches. If necessary, take a
break or give up.
D. Use information
technology, media,...
Find ways to use
information technology, media, and practices effectively to
support, rather than undermine, effective communication and
collaboration. Facilitate honest, open, mutually
respectful, constructive discussion face-to-face and online
– separately or in “hybrid” combinations.
E. Develop/use
guidelines, techniques, technologies, …
Offer, explore, and develop guidelines,
techniques, and examples for converting "Dangerous
Discussions" into civil, constructive conversations.
Back to Top of
Page
III.
Develop Solutions! Build something together!
Challenge, implement, test,
and improve solutions. Help participants develop
implementation plans and take first steps. Find or build
new "solutions" for specific Dangerous Discussions issues
that may benefit as many as possible, while increasing
mutual respect and understanding among participants. The
process is not complete until acceptable solutions are
found! [Or impasse is reached.]
Back to Top of Page
"Dangerless Discussions?"
[Note: Here’s a tough issue where I already need some
help! I welcome suggestions for an alternative title
instead of "Dangerous Discussions". Some early
responders to this paper have rejected its title because
even suggesting that their institution might need to hold
“dangerous discussions” would be too negative or
inflammatory.
Perhaps those who find the title
unacceptable may especially need to participate in such
efforts, and I don’t want to exclude them. But the title
needs to say or imply that we want to help institutions
where some people are finding it difficult to open (initiate
or participate publicly in) some important conversations.
Would it be any better to say something
like “Facing Tough Issues Together”? We cannot avoid
acknowledging that, among those whose participation in the
discussions would be essential, some feel they would be
risking too much to participate under present conditions.
What about “Daring Discussions” or
“Courageous Conversations”?
Please send your suggestions to Steve
Gilbert at
GILBERT@TLTGROUP.ORG]
Back to Top of
Page
|
